Mr. DIETZ. I frankly do not know. I do not really remember who saw them.

Senator TOBEY. Do you know that certain individuals connected with the moving-picture interests did go to C. B. S. and N. B. C. and remonstrate and demand that it be changed?

Mr. DIETZ. I do not think they remonstrated or demanded, but that they have discussed these things. Whenever a particular question falls into the realm of opinion-and, of course, the movie itself has the aura of demanding opinion as to its merit. That is the type of business we are engaged in. Whenever personalities are involved and there is much at stake, and whenever there is intense human competition, it is perfectly understandable that all forms of communication should be the subject of discussion. Now, where it takes a form that you consider reprehensible, that is only your opinion that it is so. I protest that no such action that could not be urged and discussed completely, has been taken.

Senator TOBEY. You seem to state it with certain qualifications. You give a picture to us here that certain parties went to N. B. C. and C. B. S., but there is a limitation on what they said. Now, you know that they went, and you know there were certain limitations, but you do not know who they were. Is that correct?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, I would like to explain it this way to you, Senator Tobey: I know that if I ran into a broadcasting official I would say, "That is pretty lousy stuff that Fidler is doing on your air waves." I might have any number of informal discussions. Senator TOBEY. That is not really an answer to my question. You have told us that you knew of incidents, or of this thing happening, and then you have gone to a limited extent to say what they said and did, and to describe in a measure what was done, but as to who the gentleman was or the gentlemen were, you do not know; is that it? Your memory is good as to its having taken place.

Mr. DIETZ. I do not want any reflections made on my memory. I am giving you as correct a statement as I can. First, let us relate this to the point: we do not advertise to any extent on the radio. The radio itself often comes to us for service. It is collaboration. There were some meetings of parties, and I could not name them, and they did discuss with the National Broadcasting Co., I believe, the question of changing that bell system or the timing of the bell system of Mr. Fidler's. I read Mr. Fidler's testimony that he stated that. Substantially, again, as a wording, that is correct. It was desired to have Mr. Fidler's reviews deferred until some time more nearly simultaneous with the showing of the picture.

Senator TOBEY. How do you know that?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, I know that through the many, many communications that I have with the coast over a period. It is a fact.

Senator TOBEY. But the interesting feature, and the important feature, is that while you know the fact and you know the instance and you know the limitations, you do not know the personalities. Mr. DIETZ. Well, if you will allow me

Senator TOBEY. Yes.

Mr. DIETZ. I will attempt at some very reasonable time to give you the personalities.

Senator TOBEY. Thank you very much. That is all I have to ask. Senator CLARK of Idaho. Mr. Dietz, I have not got quite all this Stahlman and Los Angeles Times thing in my mind. I am going into it briefly to see if I understand you. As I understand it, you have never seen Mr. Stahlman in your life?

Mr. DIETZ. I don't think I have.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, I mean as far as your memory serves you, of course.

Mr. DIETZ. That is right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. As I understand you, you have never written him a letter, to the best of your knowledge?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, I am pretty sure I must have written him a letter at some time or other, because I have written letters to every publisher at one time or another about films.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Then, you have never, however, written him any letter in connection with this incident which occured in Nashville that we have been talking about?

Mr. DIETZ. That is correct.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You have talked to him once, you say, on the telephone, which is since these hearings started?

Mr. DIETZ. Right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Where did you talk to him then? In Washington here?

Mr. DIETZ. Washington; yes. He was in the Navy Department. I called the Banner, found out that he was in the Navy Department, put through a call to the Navy Department, and had the conversation with him.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. With him at that time?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And he told you that he had no knowledge of having any communication from you on this incident? Mr. DIETZ. That is right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. That is right. Now, how long has Mr. Crull been with you?

Mr. DIETZ. I don't know; I don't even know if he is there now. Senator CLARK of Idaho. You do not know whether he is there now or not?

Mr. DIETZ. That is right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. How, then, did you ascertain what had happened down there in Nashville in connection with this incident? Mr. DIETZ. Mr. Stahlman wrote a letter to Will Hays in which he complained, and rightfully so, that a manager of a theater had told him substantially what has been said. Now, Walter Trumbull, who is employed in the office of the Motion Picture Producers & Distribtors of America, telephoned me and said, "What is this about the Nashville Banner?"

And I said, "I don't know. What is this about the Nashville Banner?"

And he says, "Stahlman says you are trying to fence with him, or whatever you would say."

And I said, "Well, let's find out about that. I don't know anything about that," and he came to see me.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Who came to see you?

Mr. DIETZ. Walter Trumbull.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Walter Trumbull. Under Will Hays? Mr. DIETZ. Under Will Hays. He came to see me with the letter, which I read.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You read the letter?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Do you recall the terminology of that letter, broadly?

Mr. DIETZ. I think I recall it pretty well; yes.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And did it contain in it a threat to withdraw advertising by this manager if Fidler's column was not dropped from the paper, substantially

Mr. DIETZ. I would say that Mr. Stahlman said that this man had threatened to withdraw advertising. I don't know whether he said that or whether he said that he threatened to have M-G-M withdraw its advertising.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes. Did you see the letter that Crull wrote to Stahlman?

Mr. DIETZ. No, sir.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You saw the letter that Stahlman wrote to Will Hays?

Mr. DIETZ. That is right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes.

Mr. DIETZ. That is the only letter I have seen that had to do with this subject.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And then what did you do after that telephone conversation in connection with this incident? You said you called the theater department

Mr. DIETZ. After what telephone conversation?

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Well, after Mr. Trumbull cae to see you. We will put it that way.

Mr. DIETZ. No; I didn't. I believe I called the Nashville Banner.
Senator CLARK of Idaho. Oh, you called the Nashville Banner?
Mr. DIETZ. Yes.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And talked to whom?

Mr. DIETZ. I talked to a representative, and first I called the-this is a confusion in my mind: how the representative of the Nashville Banner came to see me. That is a confusion, a legitimate confusion. All I do know is that I had a conversation and I believe luncheon— I am not sure with a representative-an advertising representativeof the Nashville Banner.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And advertising representative?
Mr. DIETZ. Yes.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You do not know whether you talked to him on the telephone at Nashville or whether he came and dropped into your office and you had lunch with him?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes. That is correct. I don't remember the circumstances through which the meeting-it was in the normal course of a business appointment.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes. And did you arrange the appointment or did the representative of the Nashville Banner arrange the appointment?

Mr. DIETZ. I am quite sure I did, to straighten that out when I saw that letter.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Then, if you arranged the appointment, and to refresh your memory, you must have either called or written the Nashville Banner, must you not?

Mr. DIETZ. No; that is a debatable point. I think that I probably called the local representative.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. The local representative in New York? Mr. DIETZ. Yes; that's right.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You do not recall, though, specifically? Mr. DIETZ. I don't recall. No; I don't recall that. I mean I don't recall whether-who I called.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. That is right.

Mr. DIETZ. Yes.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Now, and who was this representative of the Nashville Banner?

Mr. DIETZ. Don't remember his name.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You do not remember his name?

Mr. DIETZ. No; don't remember his name.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Did he tell you that Mr. Stahlman had sent him up there to discuss this matter with you?

Mr. DIETZ. Well, to try to recapture that conversation, which is quite difficult, I believe that I said that nobody could represent Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer on the question of advertising except me. Senator CLARK of Idaho. Now, do you recall.

through?

Mr. DIETZ. No. I-substantially, again, this is what I said.
Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes; I understand.

Mr. DIETZ. Yes.

Are you

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Now, approximately how long was that luncheon conversation after the letter was written by Crull to Stahlman?

Mr. DIETZ. I would say almost immediately.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Almost immediately?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Following that lunchean conversation that you had with the advertising. representative of the Nashville Banner, then what did you do?

Mr. DIETZ. Following the-following what did I do?

Senator CLARK of Idaho. The lunchean engagement, yes. In connection with this incident, I mean.

Mr. DIETZ. Well, bear in mind that except in relation to the fact that I disapproved of any such conversation that would represent my actions, I had no other action to take in relation to the Banner, because at no time was it ever contemplated or ever actually donethat is, related to withdrawal of advertising from the Nashville Banner.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And this was

Mr. DIETZ. Before, during, or since, but I am quite sure that at that time I must have called the theater department to register my disapproval with this misrepresentation on the part of anybody who thought he had an overlapping function.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. You say you must have. Do you have a definite recollection of such a conversation?

Mr. DIETZ. No, I don't. I haven't a definite recollection of it, as a matter of fact.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Then you do not know whether you did call the theater department or not? You just assume you would have done that in the regular channels?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes; that is correct.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And then the incident dropped as far as you were concerned, as far as you recall, until these committee hearings started?

Mr. DIETZ. That is correct.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. All right. Now, your theater, or Loew's theater at Nashville; is it owned entirely by Loew's?

Mr. DIETZ. I think it is.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. And this manager, Mr. Crull, would be a salaried employee?

Mr. DIETZ. Yes.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Approximately, if you know, what would a theater of that class-I do not want to get too personal, but approximately what scale of salaries would be paid to a manager of a theater of that class?

Mr. DIETZ. I am not too confident in answering that question. I would say

Senator CLARK of Idaho. $5,000? $6,000? $7,000?

Mr. DIETZ. That is probably high.

Mr. SCHENCK. May I? Mr. Chairman, may I answer that?

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Yes, Mr. Schenck.

Mr. SCHENCK. I think he is getting anywhere between seventy-five and a hundred dollars a week.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. Thank you.

Mr. DIETZ. Thank you, Mr. Schenck.

Senator CLARK of Idaho. All right. Thank you, Mr. Schenck. Now you

Senator TOBEY (interposing). Just a minute, Mr. Chairman, if I may. Relating to Mr. Schenck's reply, what was the question? Who was getting a hundred or seventy-five dollars a week? Senator CLARK of Idaho. Crull.

Senator TOBEY (addressing Mr. Schenck). Well, I want to compliment you on your memory. You could not remember the companies you repreesnted, but you could remember what he is getting down

there.

Mr. SCHENCK. May I answer that?
Senator TOBEY. Wonderful memory.
Mr. SCHENCK. May I answer that?
Senator TOBEY. Yes; you may.

Mr. SCHENCK. Why did I remember seventy-five to a hundred? Because that is about according to length of service. We start the manager about seventy-five a week up to a hundred.

Senator TOBEY. Well, how did you remember how long he had been serving?

Mr. SCHENCK. Allow me, sir. As I was going to say, that that is definitely natural because that is a policy. All right, sir, and I know